“Everything calls peace, Schalom! Then it will occur – a new Middle East war suddenly flames up, big naval forces are facing hostiley in the Mediterranean – the situation is strained. But the actual firing spark is set on fire in the Balkan: I see a “large one” falling, a bloody dagger lies beside him – then impact is on impact. …”

The United States Congress is currently discussing an extremely dangerous bill that could escalate the situation in Syria and lead to a greater global conflict involving the U.S., Russia, Iran and China.

H.R.5732, the “Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act of 2016” was passed in the House of Representatives on November 15. The bill would give the U.S. the power to impose a no-fly zone over Syria, which would only serve to increase tensions between the U.S. and Russia. According to U.S. Military Gen. Joseph Dunford, “controlling all of the airspace in Syria would require us to go to war against Syria and Russia.”

Gen. Dunford treats the question about controlling the air space and imposing a no-fly zone as if those two mean a completely different thing militarily. He proceeds to agree with Sen. Roger Wicker in saying that imposing a no-fly zone may not necessarily require the U.S. to go to war full-scale.

We must however keep in mind the implications of imposing a no-fly zone which essentially translates to controlling the airspace by the one enacting it. It would also prevent the Syrian military and government from operating in the airspace of their own country further weakening the Syrian government’s fight to hold power.

Russia has many assets in Syria and has continued to stand by Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, while the U.S. and its Western allies fund and support “moderate Syrian rebels” working to overthrow Assad and his regime. The U.S. actively working on militarily eliminating a Russian ally could be considered an act of war in itself. Russia is very much aware of Western funding and support of radical Islamic rebels including ISIS.

Gen. Dunford treats the question about controlling the air space and imposing a no-fly zone as if those two mean a completely different thing militarily. He proceeds to agree with Sen. Roger Wicker in saying that imposing a no-fly zone may not necessarily require the U.S. to go to war full-scale.

We must however keep in mind the implications of imposing a no-fly zone which essentially translates to controlling the airspace by the one enacting it. It would also prevent the Syrian military and government from operating in the airspace of their own country further weakening the Syrian government’s fight to hold power.

Russia has many assets in Syria and has continued to stand by Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, while the U.S. and its Western allies fund and support “moderate Syrian rebels” working to overthrow Assad and his regime. The U.S. actively working on militarily eliminating a Russian ally could be considered an act of war in itself. Russia is very much aware of Western funding and support of radical Islamic rebels including ISIS.

In Dec. 2015, Russia’s Defense Ministry revealed it had proof that Turkey was involved in Islamic State oil trade. Since then, they have continued to point the blame at the U.S. and its allies for ISIS and the destabilization in Syria.

We can also confirm these are not false allegations from Russia. “The Podesta Emails” leaked by WikiLeaks consisting of email conversations from top officials of the Democratic Party, including Hillary Clinton, confirm the direct sales of weapons to ISIS.

Despite Clinton losing the presidential election, tensions remain high between the U.S. and Russia. American media continues to absurdly push a false narrative of Russian cyber attacks being behind the leaked DNC emails from Wikileaks, despite the lack of any evidence for such allegations. Mainstream media outlets have doubled down on their propaganda by further releasing a list of proclaimed “fake news.”

The same media pushing this narrative of fake news and working with the Russians, have done very little coverage of the H.R.5732 bill. The bill was received in the Senate, read twice, and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations as of November 16. If it passes the Senate, it will go to the president for approval.

Once approved, the U.S. can enact a no-fly zone and have the authority to shoot down any aircraft including Russian air force targeting ISIS militants. Russia has recently deployed its own S-300, S-400 air defense SAM’s warning against a U.S.-led coalition. Based on the history of the Syrian civil war, it would appear the Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act isn’t mainly focused on protecting Syrian civilians, but rather protecting U.S. interests and rebels from pro-Assad forces.

ISIS was nearly eliminated, losing most of its ammunition and heavy vehicles in October by Russian airstrikes, yet the terrorist organization has been rejuvenated and is still operating. A no-fly zone may actually be used to prevent Russian air force from targeting ISIS militants and provide cover for further rebuilding and rearmament.

While the U.S. claims to be at war with ISIS, it continues to take stands and promote actions that in fact would support, protect and build up the terrorist organization. The approval of H.R.5732 could be a big step in protecting ISIS militants and in providing a stronger influence of power to the U.S. and its allies in Syria.

A no-fly zone could pose more danger as it more easily allows the possibility of conflict and error to take place. It very well could be a closer push towards direct conflict between Russia and NATO. Recent announcements of the Russian ‘Satan 2’ missile powerful enough to “wipe out UK, France or Texas” could indicate Russia’s preparedness for such a turn of events in Syria. Their recent massive nuclear war training exercises involving 40 million of its citizens could reiterate preparations for potential global conflict.